3 ms·
That is indeed quite some bloat. I suppose it makes sense for use cases where domain name related metadata is needed across the internet infrastructure (like fo
by potamic 5y ago
That is indeed quite some bloat. I suppose it makes sense for use cases where domain name related metadata is needed across the internet infrastructure (like for email with SPF). Just not sure it's a good idea to extend DNS for data like contact info that is ultimately meant for human consumption. Where do we draw the line otherwise? I could start caching web artefacts in TXT records or even serve entire web pages.
- elliottinvent 5y agoI agree there’s a line where putting data in DNS is just a gimmick (eg storing images in DNS) because the web does it infinitely better. But in the case of contact information I think it makes a lot of sense. This demo site is an intense example because it’s contact info for very large companies. For smaller companies it’s just one DNS TXT record, usually under the original 512b DNS UDP packet limit. I don’t agree that contact information is meant for human consumption. The humans (or often machines) at the end of phone numbers are for humans but the route to get there (eg telephone system) is designed for machines.